Destroying a beer's legacy...

More than once I've been totally confused by this assertion. I'm still not clear on why it's artifical rather than natural. Are you saying they could produce more (without disrupting their normal production schedule) than they do, say enough to go national, as say CBS, but deliberately choose not to do so? How are you distinguishing between artifical scarcity and scarcity imposed by circumstances such as having enough solid steady cash flow to stay in business?

I'm often confused, but this I truely don't understand how folks know it's deliberately kept scarce....rather than just being a occasional special release that they squeeze into their normal production schedule.

 

The question is whether distributors buy as much next year given how much is still in stores. Founders will care if orders are way off. If they had ramped up slower, they could have preserved cult status and it wouldn't be sitting on shelves for months, making it look like a mere mortal beer. I wonder if Founders won't give KBS a year or two off or change it up with variants.

 

It's artificial from the standpoint that it apparently doesn't take several years to make and doesn't seem to have some rare low-availability ingredient that would prevent them from ramping up production. I suppose it's possible that their brewing technique has high risk and low yield, but I'm doubting that. With their production capability, if I had a cult status beer that was selling for $100 a bottle, I'd make room in the production schedule and warehouse to slowly ramp it up, get it into more hands, and good for them if they can maintain the cult status and price. It is a business and if there are enough of us suckers to buy it, why wouldn't they milk it?

 

I might think that the amounts might vary by how many bourbon barrels are available as well. There’s a lot of competition for used barrels both here in the US and in Scotland. I had a marvelous Glenmorangie finished in Ruby Port barrels that was outrageously good, but the scotch was first aged for 10 years in used bourbon barrels then 2 in Port. I liked CBS a lot, but imo theres a bit of duplicity with KBS, for my part I’ve never got a maple hit, and maple is usually a pronounced flavor. So to my palate they were similar enough I wouldn’t feel the need to buy CBS again.

 

If the price is deliberately being kept far below the market-clearing rate, there's a shortage that easily could be remedied and the scarcity, to the extent that we're using it as a synonym for shortage, is artificial due to the intentionally low pricing. When KBS and CBS were flying off the shelves the moment they hit them, clearly the price was being set far lower than it should have been if the goal were short-term revenue maximization, and the result was an inefficient allocation of resources, including but not limited to waste in the form of high transaction costs (such as time spent to track drops and people bailing from work to rush to pick up beer). If the resources truly are so limited that only a tiny amount of supply actually could be generated, then the price should spike accordingly to prevent a shortage. In reality, regardless of the practical availability of resources, breweries often keep prices low 1) defensively to avoid pushback and negative word-of-mouth, such as misguided talk of "price gouging," and 2) proactively to generate hype as people witness and publicize high demand at the intentionally low prices. Essentially, they use intentionally unnecessarily low prices and the shortages they inevitably generate as a marketing tool to promote their businesses.

This is common in other areas as well; I immediately think of fans of certain sports teams who brag of the long wait lists for season tickets. The number of seats, in the short term, is fixed, but the shortage is entirely unnecessary. Jack up the prices substantially, and many would-be customers quickly will bow out. The practice may well, however, add value on the producer side (at the expense of the many consumers who are perfectly willing to pay more than the asking price and their fellow consumers are willing to pay but are denied the opportunity and don't get a chance to enjoy the product*) due to the goodwill it generates among economically naive consumers. That goodwill manifests in a large consumer price premium to the lucky ones at the front of the queue as well as in the form of pride due to the perception of a large amount of interest among fellow fans, a perception that is exaggerated because that large amount of interest occurs only at artificially deflated prices.

* In reality, the secondary market largely eliminates this problem, with the beneficiaries being those who buy at the artificially low prices. The lost revenue to the producer is the price of the artificial scarcity marketing gimmick. In beer, in the United States, the secondary market is largely illegal, so the inefficient allocation of resources is even stronger than in sports.

 

I have a HIll Farmstead 2X Nelson every once in a while to put salve in the wound that is Alpine Nelson — but it’s not the same.

 

OK, that is not the Marketing use of the term, but I undersand much more now. I'd suggest though that what we see there is real scarcity not artifical scarcity. Just as the difference between sweetners and artifical sweetners can make a difference. the issue is much the same in marketing. One can, indeed take advantage of scarcity to do marketing but it that isn't artificial and can be even worthwile thing to do in deciding what product to add to the core line up. Thanks for the well thought out reply. (I'm still a bit trapped by what I've learned from the pro marketers If had the chance to work with occasionally.)

 

Thanks for all that very useful information. That's also some of why I don't understand why the term "scarcity marketing" gets used when clearly the scarcity is a "natural" one of resources such as size, risk of disrupting the cash flow required to stay in business, etc. Indeed, me, there is no doubt scarcity has an effect (as a collecter of certain antique glassware my wife and I experience the effects of true scarcity regularly. ) But I also think I prefer natural scarcity over being artifically manipulated in a calculated move to create the impression of scarcity. Maybe that's just me.

 

This is a great argument. We as people often want something on a pedestal. Brew worship.
I agree that scarcity has no flavor. Good beer is good beer. I will buy more if I can get more when I want it. I used to rarely get a KBS. Now that it is more abundant I idolize it less, sure, but I drink and enjoy more and that is more important to me.

Now what really gets me is when the mass production hurts the overall quality of the beer and there are unfortunately several examples of this.

 

Really a fantastic post, agree with everything except the difficulty distinguishing between CBS and KBS.

I do agree that the maple in CBS is subdued whether the beer is consumed fresh or with some time on it.

 

You do realize, I hope, that then you would be doing what you've called "scarcity marketing" yourself?

 

I'll point out that "truck chasing," queuing, paying high prices, and hording aren't necessarily irrational behaviors on the part of consumers, even the ones legitimately motivated by beer and not the hype around it. If there's reason to believe that supply will remain highly limited, and given that there's not really a legal secondary market for these products, it may behoove consumers to take extreme measures to obtain these products in the rare situations in which they are available when they're confident that their enjoyment levels from consumption will be inordinately high.

If you're looking to try a highly regarded, limited release beer on spec that you've never had previously, it helps to know that you're competing with some folks who truly love the product to obtain it, and those highly motivated competitors are going to jack up the cost (not necessarily in dollars but in time and/or difficulty). I do think, however, that hype, bragging rights, the prospect of impressing friends, etc. -- more than expected enjoyment of taste -- is the primary motivator 90+% of the time in these artificial-scarcity-generated mad dashes of the sort that used to accompany KBS and CBS.

 

Just commenting that I had my first 2019 KBS last night. This beer is still world class. I can confidently say that the increased production has NOT led to a drop in quality and thus the “mass availability” is nothing but a positive in my book.

 

I live in SC so I get NC Sierra...it's not as good as CA beer. I am lamenting about a once favored brewery ruining their legacy..just like the title of the thread. What did you miss?

 

Weekend update:

Thank you everyone who hates KBS. My grocery store lowered their every day price on it to $17.98/4 pack.

Picked up a 4 pack of that and a 30 rack of Naturdays ($13.98) yesterday.

Gonna blend 6 oz of each next weekend to pre pool party for the Cormier-Stipe rematch. Go DC!!! Let's get weird!!!!

 

That surprises me.

While admittedly, I don't frequent the South-Atlantic forum, is that a consensus opinion, or just your opinion (or something in-between)?

Any opinion on why?

 

One more question: do you think this is the case for certain brands (e.g., SNPA, Torpedo,..) or do you think this is the case across the breadth of their portfolio?

Cheers!

 

I really don't believe it for a second. In fact it's fresher than ever.

 

Just my opinion. [that still counts right?] No newbie here-55 and drinking for 40 of those years yes we start early down south. I always loved SN and have consumed more SNPA that most people here. I was excited to have SN come to NC and even visited the brewery. It seems like their expansion has hurt the quality of the line and they are now more interested in the bottom line than making great beer. I believe they destroying their legacy. They have put out a ton of just so-so beers lately and and I believe they have lost their way.

 

I still enjoy SNPA,Torpedo, and Tropical Torpedo. But they haven't released anything in the past few years that impressed me....IMHO! Cheers!